Deng, S; Ni, P; Zhu, H; Cai, Y and Pan, Y (2024) Artificial cognition to predict and explain the potential unsafe behaviors of construction workers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(7): 04024074, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Unsafe behavior is considered the primary cause of construction safety accidents. However, the main measures for unsafe behavior management are real-Time monitoring and postevent correction, which cannot prevent unsafe behavior. Therefore, this study attempted to construct an artificial cognition approach to predict the potential unsafe behavior of workers and explain why workers engage in unsafe behaviors. First, based on the cognitive model of unsafe behavior, data on workers were collected with a questionnaire, and the cognitive model was validated. Second, the cognitive process of unsafe behaviors was analyzed using latent class analysis, and the cognitive characteristics of four types of unsafe behaviors were obtained. Subsequently, with the cognitive model of unsafe behavior as the input attribute, seven types of algorithms (gradient Boosting, random forest, naïve bayes, back propagation, K-nearest neighbor, logistic regression, and support vector machine) were used to construct artificial cognition to predict the potential unsafe behaviors of workers. The results showed that all seven algorithms performed well for prediction. Thus, artificial cognition that simulates the cognitive process of unsafe behavior is not limited to particular algorithms. Finally, artificial cognition was empirically validated in a construction project. The findings demonstrated that artificial cognition could effectively predict the potential unsafe behavior of workers and provide an explanation for why workers engage in unsafe behaviors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | artificial cognition; behavior management; potential unsafe behavior; predicting behavior |
| Index terms: | back propagation, latent class analysis, logistic regression, construction worker, monitoring, forest, unsafe behaviour, construction safety, cognition, construction project, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, control systems, practitioner, environmental science, algorithms, production management, financial risk, cognitive psychology, environmental health, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Cost Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here